This question will be deliberated threadbare by the Supreme Court tomorrow, which is dealing with a case of a 35- year-old HIV-positive destitute woman, who was raped on the streets of Patna and is 26 weeks pregnant.
The apex court today wanted to know why the Patna High Court and Patna Medical College and Hospital (PMCH) had sought the consent of her father and husband when the victim herself was against going ahead with the pregnancy keeping in mind that there was no family support to her.
As the matter came up for hearing, a bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and A M Khanwilkar was informed about these facts by her counsel.
The submission evoked sharp reaction from the bench which said "in the unfortunate circumstance, when a woman is raped and she is pregnant, her dignity to life is affected."
"How can her brother, father or husband be asked to give a consent? It is she who will mother the child," the bench said, while posting the matter for hearing tomorrow.
"She had said that she would terminate her pregnancy. The hospital asked for the consent of the father which he gave, though it was not required under the law," she said.
To this, the bench asked Additional Solicitor Generals Tushar Mehta and P S Narsimha, "how is the father's consent required?"
Mehta said it was not required in this case.
Grover also said when the woman had approached the high court, it had also asked her father and husband for consent.
Meanwhile, the medical board of AIIMS, which was asked by the apex court to examine the woman, gave its report and said that she was in her advanced stage of pregnancy.
The apex court had earlier said it would not go into the orders of the high court which had held that the medical board's report has stated that it would be unsafe for the life of the petitioner and there was a compelling responsibility of the state to keep the child alive.
The high court had said the woman's pregnancy had crossed the legal embargo of 20 weeks under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971.
In her plea, the woman said she was a destitute and had come to know about her pregnancy for the first time around the 13th week, and that too after she was rescued by Shanti Kutir, a Women's Rehabilitation Centre, and taken a pregnancy test on January 26.
The woman said she had expressed her desire to terminate her pregnancy on March 4 to a research officer of Koshish, a Field Action Project of Tata Institute of Social Sciences, with whom she was in contact.
According to the plea, the hospital refused to admit the woman owing to lack of identity proof.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
